[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [2.6.17-rc5-mm2] crash when doing second suspend: BUG in arch/i386/kernel/nmi.c:174

> > This sounds wrong to me. Shouldn't the the effect of hotunplugging a cpu be to
> > put the driver in a state equivalent to if that cpu simply didn't exist?
> > Unplugging shouldn't assume we're going to subsequently have either a driver
> > suspend, or a replug.
> This is my biggest problem or maybe my complete lack of understanding, is
> that I don't know how to determine what state I am in during a hotplug

Basically you can't/shouldn't determine that.

> I thought it would make more sense if a few more states were to the
> hotplug event list. For example, in addition to CPU_ONLINE and CPU_DEAD,
> there could also be something like CPU_SUSPEND, CPU_FREEZE, CPU_RESUME,
> and CPU_THAW.
> Anyway, I am probably complicating the matter. I'll whip something up and
> post it for review.

I think you are overcomplicating this. Just forget about
suspend/resume, and reinit cpus from the scratch each time. It may
lead into some 'interesting' behaviour if someone tries to suspend
while profiling, but I believe we can live with that.
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-08 22:30    [W:0.052 / U:3.660 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site